USB 2 Still Slow

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
I guess you're thinking about superfetch already! Interesting read test results, I'll have a look. I'll try a USB-USB test as well as I've got a USB key to hand now.

As far as Superfetch goes, I replied to a question elsewhere about that earlier on (although at first I misread/skim-read and thought the guy was asking if he could install Vista to USB!!). The whole thing seems like a good idea in theory, but in practise I can't see it working quite so well - it's the same sort of 'massive performance increase with little or no extra hardware' promise that we had about WinFS - which even MS agree is a good way off.
 
Ahh, superfetch...that is what it is called. LOL, I forgot.

I know it works well because the guy in my local paper has tested out on a test vista build. I'm definately looking forward to that capability. Time is everything.

(although at first I misread/skim-read and thought the guy was asking if he could install Vista to USB!!).
Click to expand...

ROFL!................link?

Tell me your results after you test usb to usb; they should be interesting as well.



BTW, did you pm Fredi (the forumz leader) about an article on this subject?
 
No, I haven't PM'd, if you could that would be great. You want me to post a link to a thread where I made a bit of an ass of myself?? No way!!

I'm going to do USB>USB tests tomorrow, once on my PC and then just out of curiousity I'll use the same USB keys on my PowerBook as well.
 
No, I haven't PM'd, if you could that would be great. You want me to post a link to a thread where I made a bit of an ass of myself?? No way!!
Click to expand...

LOL, ok I'll do it.

I'm going to do USB>USB tests tomorrow, once on my PC and then just out of curiousity I'll use the same USB keys on my PowerBook as well.
Click to expand...

Wonder what will happen. Do you think there will be a difference between PC and Mac?
 
Sorry for not replying sooner (performed the test, wrote the results in Word, then promptly forgot about it)!

Okay, I used 2 USB 2.0 keys, both 256mb. One was a SanDisk Cruiser Mini and the other a Viking.

I copied a 100mb file (a RAR of a John Jorgenson album ripped by dbPoweramp in CBR320) first from HDD to USB. The result was pretty good, about 20-25 seconds. Secondly from USB-USB, I had some problems here. The file took about 40 seconds this time, although I think this might have something to do with the fact that both sticks were on the same USB controller? Maybe not.

I did both tests on my PowerBook as well, and the results were pretty similar, only 1-3 seconds different in the first test. The second test was a little quicker on the Mac, interestingly, but only by 5 seconds.

Pretty interesting results, but nothing particularly conclusive - it was hardly 'lab conditions' stuff, and the memory sticks were different brands etc... Perhaps someone with, say, a hardware website and a full testing lab could produce more conclusive results? HINT-TOM'S!
 
Here is how the pm's went:

Hello, Fredi.

I do not know whether you have influence over Tom's Hardware Guide writers or not, but I would like to suggest an article topic. While posting in a thread about usb drives, a problem arose. There were several posters, none of which knew a whole a lot about usb drives. We got into a debate about them. However, there is not a substantial amount of information on how usb drives function, and I became very interested in the topic, which could be revolutionary. One of my main sources of information was an article (from THG) about 32 gb flash hard drives.


http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/03/21/32gb_ssd_samsung/

This sounded really cool to me, and I was amazed that how great flash drives were. They were really fast, quiet, etc. However, I wanted to test it out for myself. I conducted several tests from hd>hd, hd>usb, usb/hd, and usb>usb. I got some very interesting and surprising results. I used about 190 mb of files and got amazing results. However, it left me very confused because it shows hd>hd is much faster than hd>usb. I thought that usb was always faster, or so the article said.

Here is the thread which I was referring to. (link)

It is full of findings, but I still have a great lack of knowledge on the subject.

However, the experiments were not perfect, and probably better off conducted by a Tom's Hardware employee. I, and other are very interested in the subject of usb drives, which could totally change the computer industry. Therefore, I believe THG needs to cover this important subject. [/i]

Sincerely,
crizazykid2
Click to expand...

we tested a lot of external solution, usb, Firewire and so soon and compared it to internal drives, just check the storage section
Click to expand...

OK, I did. However, if you had pressed on my links, you would have come to the realization that I was not just talking about usb connections, but usb drives. This is what I am interested in and what has failed to be covered.
Click to expand...

OH I see, you may want to PM (pschmid) or email Patrick Schmid about it
Click to expand...

Will do! Thank you for the suggestion.
Click to expand...

So, I did pm pschmid:

Originally I PMed Fredi about this, but he suggested I PM you.

Hello, Fredi.

I do not know whether you have influence over Tom's Hardware Guide writers or not, but I would like to suggest an article topic. While posting in a thread about usb drives, a problem arose. There were several posters, none of which knew a whole a lot about usb drives. We got into a debate about them. However, there is not a substantial amount of information on how usb drives function, and I became very interested in the topic, which could be revolutionary. One of my main sources of information was an article (from THG) about 32 gb flash hard drives.


http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/03/21/32gb_ssd_samsung/

This sounded really cool to me, and I was amazed that how great flash drives were. They were really fast, quiet, etc. However, I wanted to test it out for myself. I conducted several tests from hd>hd, hd>usb, usb/hd, and usb>usb. I got some very interesting and surprising results. I used about 190 mb of files and got amazing results. However, it left me very confused because it shows hd>hd is much faster than hd>usb. I thought that usb was always faster, or so the article said.

Here is the thread I was referring to.

It is full of findings, but I still have a great lack of knowledge on the subject.

However, the experiments were not perfect, and probably better off conducted by a Tom's Hardware employee. I, and other are very interested in the subject of usb drives, which could totally change the computer industry. Therefore, I believe THG needs to cover this important subject.

Sincerely,
crizazykid2
Click to expand...

Tell me your thoughts about this; I think it is a good topic.

Hi,

one of the last articles about USB Flash storage is this one:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/08/10/two_fast_and_functional_usb_flash_drives/

Samsung's 32 GB flash hard drive announcement is an announcement and there will be no test samples available until the end of the year. Depending on the Flash memory configuration (single-level cell Flash in multi-channel setups) it should easily outperform existing mechanical hard drives. These drives are meant to do it, so they will use the SATA interface.

In addition there will be hybrid hard drives, that have a small portion of Flash memory that complements the mechanical drive. System data and frequently used files can be placed here. But again it is too early: You need such a drive and Windows Vista to get any advantage.

You're talking about USB Flash memory sticks, right? These are no replacement for conventional storage solutions whatsoever. They are faster than hard drives when it comes to access time, but they are clearly slower in data transfer.

Best,
Patrick
Click to expand...

WOW, quick response.


Yes I am talking about USB drives.

So what is the point of the 32 gb drives if data transfer is much slower?

"Hybrid drives"....You are talking about superfetch right? Man, I'm looking forward to that, it will be so cool.

They are faster than hard drives when it comes to access time, but they are clearly slower in data transfer.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I found in my tests. If you go to the thread it gives some very interesting results.

I still think this point is under-written about. I mean august 2005....that was ages ago in the computer industry

Then he never replied. :x

Results you got were pretty much expected, but I think we got our answer: reads fast, writes slow.
 
Well, we have a couple of sets of pretty dodgy results. I reckon that's all we're gonna get though, USB read/write speeds aren't exactly as exciting as the latest Conroe benchmarks in Oblivion.
 
They are still important. I'm pretty mad...I don't think the guy even pressed on my link to this thread.

Then I ask him legitimate question, he reads it and doesn't respond.
How kind.
 
I've sent him a message asking whether they could do some research into the limiting factors in a USB setup - i.e. how to get the best performance from Superfetch.
 
They may have an article about superfetch, but that will be way in the future, considering when vista comes out.

Did he respond? (if so, the response was....)
 
Although I don't see an article about Superfetch not covering which USB devices will give the best performance.
Click to expand...

Could you rephrase that? I don't really know what you mean.


Oh, and to check if he read the pm, look in your outbox....if it is still there, he hasn't seen it.
 
What I meant was that at some point people are going to say 'okay, Superfetch uses USB devices to speed up Windows, but what USB devices are going to speed up Superfetch' and voila, you've got your comparison. But that'll be post-Vista release which means months and months away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom